Pros vs Cons of having UC tenants?

The "system" will continue to collapse and people increasingly attack one another.
My thoughts here, in an improved world, (A fantasy giving the increasing amount) is a minimum wage which will only be paid ON CONDITION THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO WORK IN ANY OCCUPATION THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED IN ANY WAY POTENTIALLY PRODUCTIVE TO SOCIETY.
The brutal reality is that these people are incapable of being anything other than a net burden in a first world country as the problems of normal day to day life is quite beyond them.
Start not by asking how things might change in an ideal world. Rather start by asking what is actually possible.
There is absolutely nothing that can be done with these people except to look after them.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Shears at 07/10/2019 - 19:25I gave your comment a thumbs up in error. In fact I consider your comments to be a sweeping generalisation. Robert Mellors cautioned against sterotyping UC claimants but you have gone further and included DWP employees too. Everyone knows that society includes some individuals whose mental capacity is insufficient for them to function in modern society without significant support from those of us who are fortunate enough to be more capable, as well as some who have simply decided that "only fools and horses work".

Reply to the comment left by Paul Shears at 12/10/2019 - 00:36
I refer you to my previous remarks regarding the work of Professor Jordan Peterson of Toronto University and others which repeatedly confirms that anyone with an IQ of 83 or less can never be anything other than a net burden in a first world country.
I also suggest you take a look at "McNamara's folly" wherein the consequences of failing to face up to this unpleasant reality (What is "claimed" rather than what I believe the author Hamilton Gregory, Lyndon Johnson, or McNamara himself actually believed), and which absolutely no one wants to hear, were more immediate than is tolerated in civilian life.
My own subjective experience caused me to draw the same conclusion and continues to do so daily.
In any event, the tasks that these people attempt to complete are dumbed down to the point where they are being replaced by a string of ones and zeros at an increasing pace.
It is apparent to me that the requirement for autonomous independent judgement has for decades been a decreasing one in an increasing area of society including most of the areas previously regarded as intellectually demanding.
How this is to be accommodated, if indeed it can be, in what must surely be a major change of social structure is an entirely separate matter and certainly not one that I have a solution for. But I do believe that the first thing to do is to gather reliable evidence and examine it objectively.
Individuals are just that, but groups have long been increasingly predictable.
To quote Professor Petersons own words “We have tried absolutely everything that you can possibly imagine and a great deal more that you can’t. There is absolutely nothing that works.”

I knew a previous Principal Psychologist initially of a borstal and then of Long Lartin Prison for many years. From my indirect interaction with the UK's prison service over that time, I learned that the staff regard it as a dumping ground for people that the rest of society does not want to think about. Just like our increasing population density consequences. It was the dim ones that got caught and were used as fall guys by the more intelligent ones who often never saw the inside of a prison. Many of the inmates should simply have not been there. Their only real “crime” was being unable to cope with day to day life.
Just like their counterparts not incarcerated. The prison service is simply not set up to deal with these people and neither is the world outside prison.
The staff often referred to the institution as "Her Majesty's Hotel Service".
Just like our homeless or those virtually so and living in rent-a-coffins – what is now regarded as the successful middle class young.
Up to their eyeballs in the great education scam debt and with absolutely no skills to offer a market place which, in turn, has a reducing need for those that do.

It seems to me that the establishment proposed below, and an increasing number of others throughout first world countries, is a cheaper version of the same thing. A holding tank for the duration of incarceration before they leave and then return.
An endless cycle of poverty, ignorance and hopelessness.

Richmond upon Thames council plans via a homeless people's charity to convert a local hotel/motel into a housing project.
Local residents are shocked the council waived local planning guidelines on size of units, parking provision & communal space.
The scheme will see tenants in hotel rooms of approx. 16m2.No communal space for cooking, no laundry facilities, no warden & no outdoor space for recreation other than a car park at the front of property. Each tenant will have a separate lease for up to 2 years. (presumably they then return to the park bench or are forced to move to another rent-a-coffin.
If my own very wealthy area, cramming two strangers into a "converted" garage id now perfectly officially acceptable providing you can afford the £600/month rent. Otherwise t's back to the recycled tax fund you go or the park bench.
Do any of these people understand the underlying current reality or where it is going? Well certainly very few indeed that I know.

In my experience clashes often occur when people of theory who operate in the back office meet practical people who work on the ground in the thick of it . Their problem solving abilities unfortunately often do not align. When they do though music is made. UC tenants will benefit from this. Both of their respective approaches have merit in what they try to achieve . Practical people tend to look and deal with the problems here and now . Theorists tend to deal with a distant Utopian view 10 /20 /30 years down the line often long after they will have left that particular office. Both can leave carnage behind them or if they are high in IQ and EQ they can leave a dynamic positive blueprint that others can work on for the good of all. We need both types of people but its often not a happy marriage so progress is slow . All we can hope for is we all go in a direction which is loosely agreed by both parties to be the best route we as humans can achieve. The world needs people with High IQ AND High EQ . Together they can look after those less fortunate than themselves. I enjoy the company of those with both high IQ and/ or EQ . If push came to shove and I had to choose either / or I would prefer on balance to hang out with people who have high EQ as they have a certain desirable warmth about them. High IQ people are equally fascinating to converse with but they can sometimes leave you a bit chilly on departure . The ones with both high IQ and EQ are just the best . They seem to understand the complexities of life and a certain aura of innate goodness often surrounds them .

Reply to the comment left by Paul Shears at 12/10/2019 - 00:36
Paul, if you reread my earlier reply you will see that rather than contesting your statement I am in fact agreeing with it and confirming that it is common knowledge that society consists of persons of widely varying intelligence. What I objected to was your unsympathetic attitude toward those who, whether by accident of birth or trauma during their lifetime, physical or mental disability or for whatever reason, are unable to cope with the demands of modern society or make any economic contribution to it. In a civilised society it is inevitable that those fortunate enough to have higher IQs and more practical abilities have to support those who do not. The alternative is something akin to the experimental practices of the Nazis during WWII in their desire to produce a super-race - selective breeding and euthansia - which most of us find abhorrent. Perhaps Jonathan Clarke has encapsulated what I feel is lacking in your attitude with his use of the term EQ.

A bloody nightmare to be perfectly honest! There are so many pitfalls along the way that you can find yourself in, if you can avoid AVOID! Remember - you can't shift a bad tenant within the first 6 months of a tenancy. They can rack up arrears from month one as UC don't pay straight away and if they do they are a month in arrears. THEN the problem comes if they don't get full UC for the rent. Top ups.....bane of my life. Sometimes I feel more like a bailiff than a landlord...

Reply to the comment left by CARIDON LANDLORD SOLUTIONS at 04/10/2019 - 14:33
Hi - I might call you myself actually if you don't mind. Do you have a checklist of things to consider and check when taking on a UC tenant please?

Reply to the comment left by WP at 12/10/2019 - 17:35
Hi WP
We would be happy to speak with you and offer free advice on selecting a client on UC.
We can also provide you with a free UC survival guide for landlords in managing UC and additional information.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend!

I've gone totally against UC tenants again since last week.

Had the most simple case, tenant switched from HB to UC. I notice I put this comment above, but it got worse. UC told tenant I was getting paid when I put my last comment up, & I didn't get paid. Still waiting. This girl had been with me on HB 3 years no problems.
She mistakenly put her top up down as the monthly rent.

I'll put my letter down to Job Centre below which explains:

Now after XXXX has sent me the screenshot enclosed of her journal, I now summise that the job centre work coach or whoever interviewed Jodie has input the rent wrong.
The rent is £541.66 pm.
Housing Element pays £469.15 pm.
XXXX top up would be £72.51 pm.

Firstly, what human being with common sense would not laugh when u said your rent is £72.54pm? Where can u get a house for £72.54pm? Fully refurbished new kitchen bathroom etc.?
You have also had the rent proof. What point is there in sending DWP a rent proof if you aren’t going to read the MOST IMPORTANT figure, THE RENT!!!!

How quick can this be sorted, as XXXX ’s rent is due on 8 Oct.
XXXX was booked to see JC staff , but ended up seeing JC staff missus, she thinks it was XXXX.
These really are 5 year old mistakes. Again no bollickings please, but XXXX Job Centre are now responsible for peoples homes & lives, they can’t make these ridiculously simple mistakes.

And we couldn't correct this mistake the normal UC route. The phone staff couldn't correct it. Her journal, she left 7 entries on there. SHe made 9 phone calls. It's only cause I have 2 managers in local Job Centre that I get on with, that we managed to do it. It could have been no rent on for 2 years+ as that's how long it takes to solve these things with UC complaints.

That must be it what u say JC

In my experience clashes often occur when people of theory who operate in the back office meet practical people who work on the ground in the thick of it . Their problem solving abilities unfortunately often do not align

The UC complaints managers are absolutely I'm sorry to say Thick as f__k. The Directors the same. These are heads of UC, called Directors. They don't listen one bit. Have no idea how simple it would be to prevent homeless.
And yes, 1 year later, the staff member has moved roles so they don't care.

And as we speak, I\'m actually paying Sherrelle of Caridon to do me two new UC claims now, a touch more complicated. Cause the time involved for me doing it with my zero contacts within UC & zero emails & zero phone numbers, it\'s highly likely I may NEVER get paid the rent. And if I do, the rest of the business could go bust in dealing with UC.

Reply to the comment left by CARIDON LANDLORD SOLUTIONS at 12/10/2019 - 23:45
thanks - I;ll be in touch on Monday 🙂